August 10, 2005
Are You Now or Have You Ever Been a Christian, Part II
There are certain things you never expect to see uttered in a supposedly reliable news source but now nothing seems to be out of bounds. Today when the Boston Globe printed an article by Christopher Morris calling for the bigotry of religious suppression to protect judicial nominees from conflicts of interest I was stunned.
Of course, such a new law should cover anyone whose religion makes it impossible for them to decide on their own whether abortion should be legal; therefore, testimony should be taken from the leaders of Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, and other faiths as well.The ignorance in this simple statement alone is breathtaking. Believers are not slaves to their faith. Believers do not think abortion is murder because someone told us so or because we are threatened. We believe abortion is murder for the same reason abortion supporters believe otherwise. We have examined the evidence and searched our hearts for what is right. They would disqualify pro-life believers for considering murder as unconscionable.
There are three segments of society with a much more tangible conflict of interest that should be disqualified if we are to start excluding people from this debate namely women, fathers and doctors. After all it directly affects their income and quality of life. Where is the call to exclude these groups?
One would think Catholic judges would want such a measure in place as a means of honoring their own convictions. That this proposal will no doubt be controversial should not be a reason for failing to pursue it: Political advocacy by religious organizations is on the rise and will only become stronger. If the subject is ducked this time by the Senate Judiciary Committee, it will only come up later in a more aggravated form.One would think that people of faith would like to be protected from their misguided and quaint little beliefs. Morris also goes so far as to warn us that this ignorance needs to be stamped out now.
It's time to have this dialogue. Without it, the decisions of our highest court, already tainted by the Bush-Gore election, will increasingly be perceived as self-serving, political, and illegitimate.I was unaware that the Bush-Gore election was about abortion. So what taint are we talking about now? The taint of Republicans and conservatives as well? Is this a call to ban more then just religious people?
Maybe next time the Boston Globe will print opinion pieces by the KKK calling for the exclusion of blacks and Jews from civil rights cases.
Posted by Sid at August 10, 2005 11:23 AM | Politics
